Deck 15: Special Bailments

Question 1

Eastman sold a diamond ring to Roberts and arranged for FedEx to ship the ring from Beachwood, Ohio, to Roberts in Houston, Texas. Eastman contracted for FedEx's "collect on delivery" (COD) service for a cashier's check in the amount of $6,850. The COD airbill listed various terms and conditions for COD service, including that "[a]ll checks and money orders are collected at your risk." A cashier's check was delivered to FedEx in Houston, who released the ring. Eastman later learned from her bank that the check was invalid and sued FedEx. Is FedEx liable for the fraudulent check?

Answer 1

Fraudulent Misrepresentation is the to intention misled another party and make him believe certain facts and on the basis of these false facts individual gives consent and  enters into contract. Fraud is considered as tort, and it affects authenticity of consent of innocent party.
 
Elements involved in Fraud:
1. Misrepresentation of material facts.
2. Intention is to deceive the other party.
3.  Innocent party believed the misrepresented facts and entered the contract.
Innocent party may rescind the contract and should be restored to his original position or may enforce the contract and claim damages for the harm or loss resulting from false representation.
Facts: E contracted sale of ring to R.E arranged F for collecting on delivery of amount $6,850.COD has various condition for example cash and checks are collected at the risk of seller" Later on E discovered that check is not valid and sued f.Outcome : Since the firm has clearly explained in their terms and conditions that the company is rendering the transit service only and not the insurance for the product they are supplying. The company is not liable to repay the amount of the invalid check. The sole responsibility of the confusion will be in between the E and the R.
In a next to impossible condition if the employee of the FedEx Company confesses that the loss is due to him or due to the company. Then the company will be liable for the fraudulent.

Question 2

What are the duties and liabilities of a hotelkeeper to guests?

Answer 2

Hotel keepers are individuals who are engaged in business of loading and reloading luggage and food and entertainment suppliers. The primary business is lodging rooms for transient.
Duties of the housekeepers
1. To serve all who apply
2. To protect the guest person
3. To care for the guest property
To serve all who apply
The hotelkeepers are those who work in the area without discrimination with a clean chit. Who are drunk or violent undressed are exceptions. In case hotel don't lodges room for improper reason then hotel is liable to pay for the same.The hotel is liable to safeguard civil right. They must not be any biasness on the basis of color race religion or origin.
To protect the guest person
The person who is in the premise of hotel then it is duty of staff members safeguard him. The precautionary measures like fire escape, any criminal act in the hotel, doctor for 24 hours availability are some of the steps in the protection of the personals.
To care for the guest property
The guest which was being bought in their luggage is the liability of the hotel. They must take complete care towards the safety of luggage when the guest is not available near the luggage.

Question 3

Why does the law require every carrier to have its printed bill of lading form approved by a government agency before adoption?

Answer 3

A common carrier might try to escape or limit the extraordinary liability enforced by law, usually by the contract between carrier and the shipper.
The lading bill points the different limitations on the liability of carrier as per the mentioned evidences in the contract.
The lading bill preparation does not have any direct involvement of shipper and so the law wants that every carrier should have printed lading bill that should be approved by agency under government. This stops the way of limiting the lading bill liability.

Question 4

If a guest refuses to pay for services rendered, may a hotel sell any possessions left behind to pay the charges?

Question 5

Viola Waterton rented a room at Linden Motor Inn. She had parked her car in the below-ground garage on the inn's premises. There was no separate charge for parking the car, and Waterton did not register it with the inn. There was nothing to control entry or exit from the garage and no attendant in it. The next morning, Waterton discovered that the car had been vandalized and that several items had been stolen from it. Waterton sued Linden for the loss. Was the inn the bailee of the car? [Waterton v. Linden Motor Inc., 810 N.Y.S.2d 319 (N.Y. Civ. Ct.)]

Question 6

Marcos Arguello left his car with the valet at Sunset Station Hotel and Casinos. When he returned a few hours later for the car, it had apparently been stolen from the valet parking lot. It was found "stripped" the next day. Nevada statutes limited liability for hotelkeepers from damage due to theft of property "left in a motor vehicle upon the premises." Was the casino liable for the damage to the stolen car?

Question 7

Irving Roth, seventy-five years old and using a walker, was a guest at the New Hotel Monteleone. Arriving at the hotel via its main Royal Street entrance, Roth received assistance from the bellhop to climb the steps in the foyer to the lobby. During Roth's stay, he exited and entered the hotel through the Royal Street entrance approximately twice a day with the assistance of hotel personnel. On the third day, Roth fell while attempting to descend the lobby steps. He had decided to descend the steps alone because the hotel staff were busy assisting other guests. Roth sued the Monteleone, alleging it was liable for the injury he sustained. He testified, "I didn't wait long at all. I waited a few minutes, there was nobody there, and I started down." He said the Monteleone staff did not advise him that there was a handicapped entrance and there were no signs at the main entrance to indicate that a handicapped entrance existed; however, he knew about the handicapped entrance but opted not to use it. Should the hotel be liable?

Question 8

Because a hotelkeeper has a higher degree of liability to guests if there has been criminal activity on the hotel's premises or even in the area of the hotel, would it be ethical for a hotel owner to instruct employees not to report crimes such a car break-ins or assaults committed at the hotel? What would be the likely result of such failure to report crime?

Question 9

How long does a carrier's high degree of liability last?

Question 10

Why are some bailments called extraordinary bailments?

Question 11

Devos, Ltd. acted as a "reverse distributor" of pharmaceutical products: It collected pharmaceuticals from parties wishing to receive credit for returns and consolidated returns to the producer. Rebel shipped products for return to Devos, who forwarded the products to Stericycle. Stericycle processed the return, but the return credit was refused. Rebel then sued Devos as bailee for failure to return to Rebel the bailed pharmaceutical products. Did Devos have a continuing responsibility to Rebel after delivering the product to Stericycle? [Rebel Distributors Corp. v. Devos, Ltd., 376 Fed. Appx. 772 (9th Cir.)]

Question 12

Maria Munar was a passenger on a city bus and rang the bell to exit. Instead of stopping at the bus stop at the intersection, the driver drove past it and stopped in the middle of the next block. Munar got off the bus; the bus pulled away, and Munar began walking the 150 feet back to the intersection. She stopped there for thirty seconds to check for traffic. She saw Kurt Schmersahl's car approaching but felt she had time to get across the intersection. As she stepped into the street, she was bumped by Schmersahl's vehicle. Munar fell, injuring her leg and wrist. She sued the city, alleging it had breached its duty to her as a passenger by dropping her off at a spot other than a designated bus stop. Had the city breached its duty to her as a passenger? [Munar v. State Farm Ins. Co., 972 So.2d 1273 (La. Ct. App.)]

Question 13

Two passengers on a county bus got into a noisy argument. To quiet them, the bus driver pulled the bus to the curb and ordered everyone off. All but three passengers, Courvoisier Carpenter and the two involved in the argument, complied. The driver exited the bus, leaving the engine running. The two involved in the argument eventually left the bus. The driver then re-entered the bus and again ordered Carpenter to disembark. Carpenter began exhibiting bizarre behavior, including acting as if he were talking to somebody outside the vehicle, although nobody was there, yelling unintelligibly, and striking the windows of the bus with his fists. After watching for several minutes, the driver exited the bus again, leaving the engine running and Carpenter on board. Carpenter got in the driver's seat of the fourteen-ton bus and drove it down the street and into several vehicles, including that of Elea and Roy Parrilla. The Parrillas sued the county, alleging that it owed them a duty of care by virtue of its status as a common carrier of passengers. For whom should the court find on this issue?

Question 14

First State Depository, LLC (First State), contracted with United Parcel Service (UPS) for shipments of coins and special metals. In an eight-week period, 27 packages were lost or stolen by UPS or its employees. First State argued that it was unfair to allow UPS to limit its liability for lost or stolen shipments when UPS (or its employees) was doing the stealing. Should UPS be liable for the full amount?

Question 15

What are the different types of bills of lading, and what makes them different?

Question 16

What is the difference between a private carrier and a common carrier?

Question 17

Plano Molding Co. (Plano) contracted with a Chinese company to manufacture molds for the plastic storage boxes it produced. The terms of the contract included that the molds were to be delivered to the Plano's Illinois facility, with delivery, customs, and other similar costs included in the total price. The manufacturer contracted with THI Group, Ltd. (THI) to ship the molds from China to Plano's plant. A train carrying the molds derailed near Tyrone, Oklahoma, causing damage to the goods and personal injuries. Under THI's bill of lading for shipping, the "Merchant" warranted safe packaging for the molds. THI's insurer sued Plano for injuries caused by the train derailment. Had liability actually shifted to Plano under the bill of lading? [ Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd. v. Plano Molding Co. , 696 F.3d 647 (7th Cir.)]

Question 18

Hornbeck engaged R R to repair its ship, the Erie Service. The Erie Service was delivered to R R's shipyards on Lake Sabine in Port Arthur, Texas, for several months of repairs. During that time, Hornbeck retained access to the ship for inspection by its two on-site project managers. Four months into the repairs, R R sent its workers home one day due to inclement weather. A tropical depression had formed which was headed toward Port Arthur. R R informed Hornbeck of the weather by e-mail and asked for an extension of time to make the repairs. The Erie Service sank due to rainfall and waves. R R claimed that only a limited bailment had been created, since Hornbeck's representatives were on site, inspecting the repairs as they were being made. Did R R still have the liability of a bailee? [ National Liability Fire Ins. Co. v. R R Marine Inc. , 756 F.3d 825 (5th Cir.)]

Question 19

Denbury Resources Inc. was engaged in collecting oil through a process that injects CO2 into the ground. It wanted to build a pipeline from its CO2 reserves in Mississippi to Texas oil wells. Under Texas law, a "common carrier" has the power of eminent domain to build pipeline over private land. Denbury filed the appropriate paperwork with the State of Texas and sent its employees out to survey land for a pipeline. Part of the path would cross land owned by Texas Rice Land Partners (Rice). When the Rice farmers refused to let the Denbury employees onto their land, Denbury sued. Was the proposed pipeline running from Denbury CO2 reserves to the Denbury oil wells properly characterized as a common carrier?

Question 20

Raineri contracted with North American Van Lines (NAV L) to both pack up and move her belongings from New Jersey to California. NAV L delayed the start of packing by a few days, and subsequent loading and delivery dates were also delayed. Raineri also claimed NAV L damaged the New Jersey home and several items of property during the move. Raineri signed NAV L's bill of lading, which included specific terms for filing a claim. However, Raineri determined that it would be too cumbersome for her to comply with the claims process, compared it to a full-time job, and declared it to be a waste of her time. Instead, Raineri sued. Was NAV L entitled to require Raineri to comply with the claim terms in the bill of lading before she could prevail in her lawsuit?

Question 21

When does the liability of a carrier of people for the passengers' safety begin and end?

Question 22

Why are common carriers regulated by the government as to their prices, services, equipment, and other operational policies?

Question 23

Jan Greer purchased real property owned by Vincent and Shirley Arroz at a foreclosure sale on the property. Two years after the sale, the Arrozes sued Greer for wrongful possession of several items left on the property, including miscellaneous furniture, rolls of carpet, Christmas decorations, and ceramic accessories. Was the property abandoned when the Arrozes left it behind at the foreclosure sale? [Greer v. Arroz, 330 SW3d 763 (Ky. Ct. App.)]

Question 24

Robert Kulovany was injured while working when he fell through the floor of a trailer. Kulovany's employer leased the trailer from Cerco Products Inc. and had had the trailer in its possession for twenty months. At the time of the injury, there was a visible defect in the floor of the trailer. Under the lease agreement, Kulovany's employer had a duty to inspect the trailer for defects. Kulovany sued Cerco. As the bailor in a mutual-benefit bailment, was Cerco liable for Kulovany's injuries? [Kulovany v. Cerco Products Inc., 809 N.Y.S.2d 48 (N.Y. App. Div.)]

Question 25

An industrial lathe manufactured in Japan was shipped to Rockford, Illinois. Various companies took part in the transportation by ship, rail, and truck. SLT Express Way provided motor carrier transportation. Initially, the SLT trucker refused to accept the shipment because it was improperly tarped. After some negotiation, SLT received a release stating that the tarp on the lathe was adequate and that SLT would not be responsible for a loss from not re-tarping. Within 50 miles of driving, the tarp was destroyed, and the lathe allegedly suffered damage. Is SLT responsible?

Question 26

While traveling, Joseph and Marie Ippolito checked in to a Holiday Inn. The registration card Joseph signed and the pouch enclosing his key-card stated that the hotel was not responsible for valuables outside the hotel's safe deposit boxes. The Ippolitos put their luggage containing jewelry and cash worth $500,000 in their room and left for forty minutes. They did not see a notice on the back of their room door stating that safe deposit boxes were available. When the Ippolitos returned, the jewelry and money were gone. State law excused innkeepers from liability for loss of money and jewels if they posted notice in a conspicuous manner requiring guests to leave such items in the innkeeper's safe deposit box. Had the hotel complied with the law and thus limited its liability for the loss?

Question 27

Is a common carrier liable for injuries to a passenger caused by fellow travelers?

Question 28

When does the liability of a common carrier of goods begin?

Question 29

E. O. B. was a patient at a rehabilitation facility owned by Total Rehabilitation Medical Centers Inc. She needed to be transported to Ft. Lauderdale to another of Total's facilities for an MRI. Jose Luis Laverde, a Total Rehab employee, was assigned to transport her in a company-owned van. Laverde attacked E. O. B. in the van on the return trip. She sued Total Rehab, alleging it was liable as a common carrier for the intentional tort of its employee. Should she recover on this basis?

Question 30

DeMott purchased a ticket from Old Town Trolley Tours of Savannah Inc. (Old Town), and she began walking across the parking lot to the designated boarding place. On the way, she fell as a result of stepping in a pothole. Because the statute of limitations had passed for DeMott to sue under a premises liability theory, DeMott claimed that Old Town was liable to her under contract as a common carrier. Is a common carrier liable to a passenger for allowing its parking lot to remain in a hazardous condition? [ DeMott v. Old Town Trolley Tours of Savannah Inc. , 760 S.E.2d 703 (Ga. App.)]

Question 31

How may a carrier of people limit its liability for the loss of baggage?